This looks great! More gates, deeper combat, but it's harder to make the animations look good.

Solid_Altair

07-04-2015, 03:46 PM

Some times less is more. I very much prefered For Honor's system. In this game the defense is way too hard.

I think heavy armor fights may have the merit of being a good simulation of real heavy armor fights, in the sense of rewarding a foghter for striking the same spot many times and of the fighters tiring out gradually. I admire both systems. Though I hated that "sword time" thingy.

I'd say For Honor is similar to Soul Calibur (fewer elements in a more sound system), while Kingdom of Deliverance is similar to Dead or Alive (more elements).

MisterWillow

07-05-2015, 07:43 AM

It's the difference between Gran Turismo and Need For Speed.

The former is technical and more methodical but slower and a bit more tedious, with little, if any, room for error. The latter is flashy and fast but not realistic in aspects that don't immediately facilitate enjoyment by the player, and is therefore free of the more rigid constraints the former must abide by (like physics).

I like Gran Turismo (and I'm looking forward to Kingdom Come), but given the choice, I generally prefer Need For Speed (or Burnout, or Midnight Club).

Solid_Altair

07-05-2015, 11:23 AM

I disagree with this comparison. I don't think having more elements makes Deliverence more sophisticated (Gran Turismo-y). It just turns it into rock'em sock'm robots, because they make defense too hard. Making defense harder isn't the same as making the game more complex. Making defense harder is simply making attack easier.

A dude said that the mroe gates the more complex the gameplay. Well, how would you like 200 gates?

MisterWillow

07-05-2015, 07:28 PM

I disagree with this comparison. I don't think having more elements makes Deliverence more sophisticated (Gran Turismo-y). It just turns it into rock'em sock'm robots, because they make defense too hard. Making defense harder isn't the same as making the game more complex. Making defense harder is simply making attack easier.

A dude said that the mroe gates the more complex the gameplay. Well, how would you like 200 gates?

Many people would call Gran Turismo difficult, tedious, boring even, or frustrating---certainly not "sophisticated"---because you have to regulate speed, turning angle, etc. etc. in accordance with physics (or at least more-so than a racer like Midnight Club), worry about tire pressure and engine tuning.

In the same way, Kingdom Come requires a higher level of precision, since there are five sword positions instead of three, and there are greater consequences for messing up, because it is possible to die in a single stroke; not to mention that armour behaves in a realistic way, so you can't cleave through plate.

And I disagree slightly that 'being difficult isn't being complex'. Difficulty and complexity are certainly related; perhaps saying that higher complexity heightens difficulty. The more complexity, the more options you have, but the more options you have, the more are left unchosen when you decide on a course of action, meaning there are multiple ways of choosing poorly. So it requires more attentiveness on the player's part to know which choice is the right one and when. Conceivably, they could implement eight-direction sword controls---especially since the game can be played with a controller, to accommodate an analogue stick---or even sixteen, but beyond that it becomes impractical. They could even remove the 'gate' aspect entirely, make the sword position in attack/defense entirely free-form, and turn it into the melee equivalent of a twin-stick shooter. The sort of complexity required would make the system difficult to use, but once you got used to it, you could do things not possible in a less complex system.

But that's just one level of complexity. Add in feints (which has been mentioned in For Honor interviews as possible), and you add another combat element to consider. But again, the physics of plate armour shrugging off sword swipes are not obeyed, you don't have to regulate you stamina in a realistic way, so it's not as complex as to be (potentially) overwhelming.

Anyway, I'm starting to ramble.

Solid_Altair

07-06-2015, 02:25 PM

Feints in For Honor, from I've read/watched are not like the ones in Kingdom. In Kingdom, you can change the direction mid-attack, as if the 6 directions (remember the thrusts) are not enough. You say 16 could be impractical. My point is that the 5(6) along with feints and along with regular parries not halting the comboes is already impractical. It may seem it's making it more complex and difficult, but that is only if you think about just the defense. But what they're doing is making attacking easy-peasy. They're creating a "balance" that strongly favors attack over defense. And they're doing it because they currently have a "the more the merrier" mentality for design. I think their franchise can grow a lot once they realise the actual system and start cutting elements. This is the history of fight games.

My bet is that when you boil things down For Honor will be more complex.

MisterWillow

07-06-2015, 05:53 PM

Feints in For Honor, from I've read/watched are not like the ones in Kingdom. In Kingdom, you can change the direction mid-attack, as if the 6 directions (remember the thrusts) are not enough. You say 16 could be impractical. My point is that the 5(6) along with feints and along with regular parries not halting the comboes is already impractical. It may seem it's making it more complex and difficult, but that is only if you think about just the defense. But what they're doing is making attacking easy-peasy. They're creating a "balance" that strongly favors attack over defense. And they're doing it because they currently have a "the more the merrier" mentality for design. I think their franchise can grow a lot once they realise the actual system and start cutting elements. This is the history of fight games.

I really disagree. It's like what I'm talking about in the hardcore/arcade discussion thread. The entire system is based on visual cues. You're supposed to be watched your opponent's arm and weapon position. The feints can throw you off, sure, but you're supposed to be paying attention to every movement your opponent is making, anticipating what he's doing, and changing in an instant to suit the situation. Real fights often favour an aggressive offense over defense. If the defender is not observant of their opponents motions, then they can easily be pummeled because they leave themselves open, can't react quick enough to a change in stance, a fake punch, a sudden kick, or whatever. If nothing else, it's accurate, which is what they're going for.

As for fighting games, complexity or the lack of it can not be said of the entire genre, or even of a certain series. You have to go character by character. Take Soul Calibur. On the one hand, you have Mitsurugi, a fairly basic character, a few powerful moves, some things to mix it up once you get comfortable (like sheathing your sword for a few different draw cuts), but all in all not very complex. On the opposite end of the spectrum, you have Voldo, who can bend over backwards and walk at you like an insect, play dead, roll up in a ball, has a myriad of attack cancels, fake outs, at least three stances, and is, for anyone fighting someone skilled in playing him, a royal pain---he's complex enough to make your head hurt. How about Tekken? On the 'simple' side, you have Kazuya, or Law, or Paul, all pretty straightforward fighters with a few flourish moves to keep your opponent on their toes, and then you have someone like Lei Wulong, who has different stances that can be changed (the five animal forms of Kung Fu and Drunken Fist) along with his usual stance, can lay down, attack from the ground (beyond the kick or rolling dive), and can be a general headache to someone facing him because he's really hard to read. Even Steve has a complexity, because of his weaves and spins.

Even 3D space adds complexity over 2D, because you can sidestep to avoid attacks.

My bet is that when you boil things down For Honor will be more complex.

I don't think it will be more complex, but it doesn't need to be complex to be engaging or fun. They have a system that is fairly straightforward, but offers enough variety to go beyond a simple attack and block. I don't want a more complex system, necessarily, because then it would end up being a niche game, which would obviously be detrimental for something so multiplayer focused (though, I still do think they should add a thrust). Kingdom Come can afford to be niche, because it's singleplayer only, so they don't have to worry about keeping their player base up in the face of a complicated fighting system that would take some time to get used to against other people, and the handful of snobs who simultaneously look down their nose at people not playing it and scare new people away by mercilessly slaughtering them the moment they enter a match.

guest-7lONTXP5

07-07-2015, 05:05 PM

I think you two missed that you just need to hold a button to block any attack in Kingdom Come (maybe it will even drain some stamina or you don't regenerate it as fast ... it surely doesn't leave you in the better spot compared with the attacker) so it's better to go for the perfect blocks (well timed but still no need for right direction) which allow you to attack right after the block (i think the counterattack is just hard to block but can be blocked). This makes it less complex and a lot more playable/less niche i guess.

Sorry my english is not very well so I'm not able to to write it more clear^^

(btw why is the forum always asking me to select a user name but i just can click x or save but have no options or field to write in? xD)

MisterWillow

07-07-2015, 07:17 PM

I think you two missed that you just need to hold a button to block any attack in Kingdom Come (maybe it will even drain some stamina or you don't regenerate it as fast ... it surely doesn't leave you in the better spot compared with the attacker) so it's better to go for the perfect blocks (well timed but still no need for right direction) which allow you to attack right after the block (i think the counterattack is just hard to block but can be blocked). This makes it less complex and a lot more playable/less niche i guess.

Sorry my english is not very well so I'm not able to to write it more clear^^

Really? I remember seeing in an earlier video that you can just hold Guard and you'll block every incoming attack, but you need to push the proper direction for a parry. Maybe they decided against it and made a change (or I'm just remembering poorly).

(btw why is the forum always asking me to select a user name but i just can click x or save but have no options or field to write in? xD)

Not sure what you mean. Is there a mod that can help out?

guest-7lONTXP5

07-07-2015, 07:32 PM

He says so at 30:48 ... but maybe you are still right. At 30:40 -30:45 he is doing a perfect block and his guard doesn't change at first so i thought you don't need to change it but after he performed it (when he does the counter attack) you can see that he put it directly at the position the strike comes from.

Edit: Ok...at 32:40 you can see that he don't need to change it.

MisterWillow

07-08-2015, 01:34 AM

He says so at 30:48 ... but maybe you are still right. At 30:40 -30:45 he is doing a perfect block and his guard doesn't change at first so i thought you don't need to change it but after he performed it (when he does the counter attack) you can see that he put it directly at the position the strike comes from.

Edit: Ok...at 32:40 you can see that he don't need to change it.

Yep; heard him say that you just need to time the guard with the strike, but nothing about direction. So I suppose some of the things I was talking about don't apply, then. Interesting (and slightly disappointing). Thanks for the clarification.

I still stand by what I said concerning the system I thought they were using, though.

Solid_Altair

07-08-2015, 10:50 AM

What the hell are the directions for? Just armor?

Real fights often favour an aggressive offense over defense.
It really comes down to this. Defense is very very viable in For Honor. But do you think people will wish to turtle?
____________

As for how complexity can grow by removing elements... they actually removed that sword sheathing stance from Mitsurugi in SCV.

MisterWillow

07-08-2015, 07:47 PM

What the hell are the directions for? Just armor?

Not sure what you mean.

It really comes down to this. Defense is very very viable in For Honor. But do you think people will wish to turtle?

Defense if viable in Kingdom Come, you're just holding a guard button (see the short convo with guest-7lONTXP5 above).

Given that, defense in For Honor is somewhat less viable, since you have to gauge your opponent's attack angle, and match it. It's certainly doable, but how long it can be sustained would vary from person to person.

I'm wondering how well an attacker would do by just swinging. Someone good at reading their opponent I'm sure could deal with them, but how many people can do that, I wonder.

As for how complexity can grow by removing elements... they actually removed that sword sheathing stance from Mitsurugi in SCV.

But... that's making him less complex by removing an option from his skill set.

Solid_Altair

07-09-2015, 01:42 PM

Yeah... I must have missunderstood Kingdom Come's system. The question about the directions and aromor was about this. If you don't need to match directions to parry, why specify the directions to attack? So you can concentrate fire in one piece of armor (or where there isn't armor)?

About Mitsu... the complexity in gained in the meta game. Supposedly your choice of character would become more of a real choice. His fancy stuff made him too versatile, before. By removing it they made him more of an exclusively sturdy character. If you want faciness you gotta pick someone else. But I'd say this is far from the best example of "less is more". Some good examples are in nerfing the low attacks and the strings.that include mix ups. This is probably the strongest mark of Soul Calibur, in comparison to the other franchises. By nerfing height mix-ups they greatly increase the importance of other elements of the meta game, specially spacing.

MisterWillow

07-09-2015, 06:21 PM

Yeah... I must have missunderstood Kingdom Come's system. The question about the directions and aromor was about this. If you don't need to match directions to parry, why specify the directions to attack? So you can concentrate fire in one piece of armor (or where there isn't armor)?

They can probably program the AI so that it has to match your direction, without having it be the same for the player character, since they don't have to worry about how it would work against another player. It's one of the advantages (depending on your perspective) of it being single-player only. If they were to put that system in a multiplayer setting, they would have to make it like For Honor for it to make sense.

About Mitsu... the complexity in gained in the meta game. Supposedly your choice of character would become more of a real choice. His fancy stuff made him too versatile, before. By removing it they made him more of an exclusively sturdy character. If you want faciness you gotta pick someone else. But I'd say this is far from the best example of "less is more". Some good examples are in nerfing the low attacks and the strings.that include mix ups. This is probably the strongest mark of Soul Calibur, in comparison to the other franchises. By nerfing height mix-ups they greatly increase the importance of other elements of the meta game, specially spacing.

But I want versatility from a fighter... especially one that was always a sort of 'starting character'. You get to grasp the basics, he does moderate damage, and is moderately quick, has moderate range and has (or used to, I guess) a few flourish moves in his repertoire that gives new people a taste of complexity without overwhelming them. If you want more power, there's Astaroth or Nightmare/Siegfried, if speed, Taki (or her analogue, since I know she's gone) or Maxi, if range, Kilik or Hilde, if complexity, Yoshimitsu or Voldo.

Things like this might explain why I've lost interest in Soul Calibur (the last one I really liked was 3).

Solid_Altair

07-10-2015, 07:44 PM

The old schoolers prefer SC2. The nerf bat started hitting at 3. And kept swinging.

Do you prefer Tekken? DoA? VF?

MisterWillow

07-10-2015, 08:11 PM

The old schoolers prefer SC2. The nerf bat started hitting at 3. And kept swinging.

Yeah, SC2 was the best from a purely technical standpoint, but I really enjoyed 3. The changes to the fighting were very minor, it was the first to have create a character, and I spent hours in Chronicles of the Sword.

Do you prefer Tekken? DoA? VF?

Generally, Tekken, though I do enjoy the other two. The first couple Bloody Roar games were pretty good for a laugh, too.

2D-wise, I like Mortal Kombat, Darkstalkers (I really want a new one), and Guilty Gear.

Solid_Altair

07-10-2015, 08:40 PM

Chronicle of the Sword had so much potential! A shame they didn't carry it on. SCIV's extra mode was a lot bette rthan it looked, though, iwth the equipment effects. SCV's extra mode sucked. I thought it'd bring mix of Chronicles of Sword and SCIV's Tower, but they just delivered some cheaty AIs. SCV did have another more discreet extra mode which was awesome, even though it didn't look like much, Quick Match (because it had alternative AIs).

Anyways... going totally off-topic, here.

Gotta muster the energy to start a thread about frame advantage. What do you think? It'd be important for For Honor? Think the Devs are on it already?

At least here I know I won't be alone as an "arcade guy". It's so lonely in the EA UFC forums, in this regard.

Havemercy87

07-10-2015, 10:16 PM

Gotta muster the energy to start a thread about frame advantage. What do you think? It'd be important for For Honor? Think the Devs are on it already?

At least here I know I won't be alone as an "arcade guy". It's so lonely in the EA UFC forums, in this regard.

They said they played at 30fps and it played smoothly. However, I do think a higher fps would definitely be beneficial. I'm behind you on this, but I don't think they'll change it until after they start the alpha and begin getting more in game feedback.